President Barack Obama lives with regret after eight long years in the White House. Sure, he will be known throughout history for the unconstitutional executive orders he authorized with his “pen” and “phone,” but he wishes he could have done more to restrict our Second Amendment rights.
In a recent article for the Harvard Law Review entitled “The President’s Role in Advancing Criminal Justice Reform,” Obama reflects on some of the gun-related tragedies that occurred during his presidency: “Addressing the country after mass shootings has been one of the most frustrating and disheartening responsibilities of being President — and it’s something I’ve had to do far too often.”
Mass shootings have indeed plagued the country under the Obama administration. I wouldn’t go so far as to blame Obama for the ones he mentions in this article (Tucson, Aurora, Newtown, Charleston and Orlando). However, while he drops some startling homicide and suicide statistics later in the article, he fails to mention the devastating homicide rates in many urban areas, like Chicago, that have some of the strictest gun control laws. He has rarely commented on the daily violence in these areas, but has consistently preached from the graves of mass shooting victims to push his gun control agenda.
In doing so, he has been a huge ally for gun grabbers nationwide and has made our inner cities an even more dangerous place.
Race relations have worsened and police killings have increased under the Obama administration. President Obama could have used his race to unite the country, but he instead took sides with the violent Black Lives Matter movement, going so far as to invite one of its most prominent leaders to the White House.
Moreover, he has done nothing to stop the spread of Islamic terror attacks like we saw in Fort Hood, San Bernardino and other places. In the article, Obama asserts that gun violence “is an epidemic playing out across the country every day,” but doesn’t specifically call out jihad at all in the article. Isn’t the threat of foreign and homegrown terror just as serious?
President Obama goes on to identify what he notes are “commonsense steps to reduce gun violence” that are in line with the Second Amendment: “investing in access to mental health care,” “expanding background checks,” and “making it possible to keep guns out of the hands of suspected terrorists.”
We haven’t seen much done under the Obama administration to increase access to mental health care, and background checks are a phony way for politicians to address gun control. “Common sense” – and reality – would suggest that criminals evade background checks and procure their guns through illegal means. Why would a criminal want to be tracked by the government? Background checks may stop dumb criminals from getting their hands on a gun, but the savvy ones (particularly recidivists who have served time in the slammer) are bound to find other channels.
As for keeping guns out of terrorists’ hands, it’s much easier to root out terrorists than to block them from getting a hold of guns. Once they’re here (or radicalized), it’s just as easy for them to buy a gun on the black market as any other criminal. The Obama administration has been more concerned with addressing “Islamophobia” than with tackling terrorism head-on, and has made no progress on this front.
President Obama ends his gun-grabbing rant with his typical, clichéd line about gun control: “The actions we take won’t prevent every act of violence — but if even one life is spared, they will have been well worth it.”
In other words, an unjust action might be justifiable even if there is no proof that it will actually stop gun violence.
This delusional mentality is responsible for the advance of anti-gun legislation in our country, and is the reason why millions of law-abiding citizens have been deprived of a lifesaving tool and constitutional right. We live in a world with guns. The best thing that any lawmaker can do to is help good people to protect themselves from bad people.
The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the position of Guns.com.